STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. GANPAT DINKAR SHINDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal is filed by the appellant, State of Maharashtra being aggrieved by the judgment and order, dated 15th October, 1985 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Sessions Case No. 71 of 1985. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, acquitted both the respondents/original accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He also acquitted respondent No. 1/original accused No. 1 for the offence punishable under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) IN short, the prosecution story can be stated as follows: deceased Sunita was the wife of respondent No. 1 Ganpat Dinkar Shinde. Their marriage took place on 12th June, 1984, respondent No. 2 Chagabai Dagadu Shinde was the aunt (Kaki) of respondent No. 1. Her house was adjacent to the house of respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 was a widow. The prosecution case is that there was illicit relationship between both the accused. It is also further alleged by the prosecution that accused No. 1 Ganpat was harassing his wife Sunita for dowry. After Ganpats marriage with Sunita, Sunita was brought to her parents house for staying there for the month of Ashad. She stayed there for about 30 to 40 days, and was sent back to her matrimonial home. After Dasara festival, she was again brought to her parents place. The prosecution story further is that it was at this time that deceased Sunita started complaining about her miseries. Sunitas complaint was that there was illicit relationship between her husband Ganpat and accused No. 2 Chagabai. It was also her complaint that accused No. 1 Ganpat was demanding unpaid cash amount of dowry, as well as 20 grams of gold. Father of Sunita, Madan (P. W. 3), so also, her Uncle Suryakant (P. W. 2) assured Sunita that they would pay to accused No. 1 the remaining amount of dowry, so also, 20 grams of gold, as agreed. They also advised her to bear with the situation, and lead a happy matrimonial life. Accordingly, Sunita was reached back to her matrimonial home. The prosecution story further goes that on 10th December, 1984 i. e. about six months after Sunitas marriage with Ganpat, at about 6. 00 a. m. , Sunitas Uncle Suryakant (P. W. 2) learnt from one Baliram Dhavale (not examined) that Sunitas father-in-law had come to village Boregaon, and had left message with his daughter Dropada Sandipan about Sunita lying in serious condition. The distance between Boregaon where Dropada, so also, parents of deceased Sunita were residing, and Dhondpargaon, where the matrimonial home of Sunita was situated, was about 40 Kilometres. When Suryakant learnt this news about Sunita, to get more details, he rushed to the house of Dropada, but she was unable to furnish any details. She simply told Suryakant that her father (father-in-law of deceased Sunita) had just left her house. Suryakant then immediately picked up his motorbike and went towards Karmada-Boregaon Road. He confronted Sunitas father-in-law and questioned him as to why he did not come to Suryakants house to inform about the condition of Sunita. He also questioned father-in-law of Sunita as to whether Sunita was killed. Suryakant, however, was told by father-in-law of Sunita that Sunita died, as she was having pain in her stomach. Suryakant then went to Karmada, and conveyed the information to his brother Madan (P. W. 3) Thereafter, a truck was hired and Suryakant (Uncle of Sunita), Madan (Father of Sunita) and other family members of Sunita, along with sixty to seventy persons from village Boregaon went to Dhondpargaon. There, in her matrimonial house, they saw Sunitas dead body, which was lying with her tongue protruding. Swelling was noticed on her neck, so also, there were blackish and bluish marks on her neck. Seeing this condition of Sunita, Suryakant and Madan became suspicious about the cause of her death. The Police Patil Ramchandra Shinde (P. W. 1) of village Dhondpargaon was immediately summoned. The Police Patil came there and saw the condition of the dead body of Sunita. Parents of Sunita made grievance before him and expressed doubt about the cause of death of Sunita. The Police Patil Ramchandra Shinde (P. W. 1) prepared his report (Exhibit 9) and asked the Kotwal of the village to hand it over to PSI Jamkhed. Police Head Constable Nivrutti Kuthe (P. W. 6) received the said report (Exhibit 9 ). He then went to village Dhondpargaon in a police jeep along with a Police Constable. After arriving at the scene, Kuthe drew the inquest panchanama and directed the Police Constable Alhat to send the dead body of Sunita to the Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Jamkhed, for post-mortem examination. Thereafter, panchanama of scene of office was drawn. On 11th December, 1984, investigation was handed over by Kuthe (P. W. 6) to PSI Khilari (P. W. 7), who recorded the statements of witnesses including that of the mother of accused No. 1 Janabai and statements of several other witnesses. After getting clarification from Dr. Subhash Goyal, Medical Officer (P. W. 4), and after post-mortem report was received, in which it was revealed that the cause of death of Sunita was asphyxia due to strangulation, as per the prosecution, needle of suspension was pointed towards Ganpat and Chagabai, and it was suspected that they were found to be involved in murdering Sunita. Accordingly, Khilari filed his complaint on behalf of the State, on the basis of which, offence at Crime No. 93/84 came to be registered on 15th December, 1984 against both the accused under section 302 r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. On the same day, statements of Suryakant Kisan Dhavale and Kisan Ramchandra Dhavale also were recorded. Statements of other witnesses also were recorded between 16th December, 1984 to 10th May, 1985. Routine investigation followed and charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused persons on 26th April, 1985 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jamkhed, who by his order dated 18th May, 1985, committed the accused persons to the Court of Sessions, Ahmednagar to stand their trial. In the Court of Sessions, Ahmednagar, charge under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against both the accused, so also, charge under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against accused No. 1 was framed. Both the accused, however, pleaded not guilty, and claimed to be tried. Their defence was that of denial.

(3.) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge, after recording evidence and after hearing both the sides, came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove that death of Sunita Ganpat Shinde was homicidal. The learned Additional Sessional Judge also came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove that the accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, committed murder of Sunita by intentionally or knowingly causing her death by pressing her throat. The learned Additional Sessions Judge also gave a finding that the prosecution had failed to prove that accused No. 1 namely, husband of deceased Sunita, had ill-treated his wife. Thus, giving his finding in the negative on all the points, he acquitted both the accused of the charges which were framed against them. Being aggrieved, the State has now approached this Court by way of filing the present Criminal Appeal under section 378 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.